Efficacy and Safety of Tofacitinib in Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis or Ankylosing Spondylitis by Cigarette Smoking Status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Routine care studies of psoriatic arthritis (PsA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) demonstrated attenuated responses to tumor necrosis factor inhibitors in current/past versus never smokers. This post hoc analysis assessed tofacitinib efficacy and safety in patients with PsA or AS by cigarette smoking status at trial screening. METHODS: Pooled data from phase 3 and long-term extension (safety only) PsA trials and phase 2 and 3 AS trials were assessed by current/past versus never smoker status. Analysis included efficacy and safety data for tofacitinib 5 (PsA/AS) and 10 (PsA only) mg twice daily (BID) or placebo, and safety data in AS for tofacitinib 2 and 10 mg BID. Efficacy outcomes included American College of Rheumatology ≥ 50% responses (ACR50) and minimal disease activity (MDA) responses to month (M)6/M3 (tofacitinib/placebo) in PsA; and ≥ 40% improvement in Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society responses (ASAS40) and AS Disease Activity Score (ASDAS) < 2.1 responses to week (W)16 in AS. Safety was assessed to M48/W48 (PsA/AS), adjusted for treatment/smoking status/median body mass index (BMI) status/sex/trial/treatment-smoking status interaction. RESULTS: PsA/AS cohorts included 342/178 current/past and 572/194 never smokers. Tofacitinib efficacy was generally greater versus placebo to M3/W6 (PsA/AS), and comparable in current/past and never smokers to M6/W16 (PsA/AS). In patients receiving ≥ 1 tofacitinib dose, adjusted treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE)/serious AE (SAE)/discontinuation due to AE incidence rates (IRs) to M48 in PsA were higher in current/past versus never smokers; adjusted IRs to W48 in AS were higher in current/past versus never smokers for TEAEs, but similar for SAEs/discontinuation due to AEs. CONCLUSIONS: In both patients with PsA and AS, tofacitinib efficacy was greater versus placebo, and comparable across smoking categories. Adjusted IRs were higher in current/past versus never smokers for TEAEs, SAEs, discontinuation due to AEs in PsA, and for TEAEs in AS, complementing reports of associations between smoking and comorbidities in spondyloarthritis. Findings support increased surveillance/caution for patients with PsA or AS with smoking history. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01877668/NCT01882439/NCT03486457/NCT01976364/NCT01786668/NCT03502616.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".